People v. Delayo, 100748.
| Decision Date | 26 June 2008 |
| Docket Number | 100748. |
| Citation | 52 A.D.3d 1114,860 N.Y.S.2d 321,2008 NY Slip Op 05824 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. SHAWN DELAYO, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Schenectady County (Drago, J.), rendered November 17, 2006, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of two counts of the crime of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree.
Peters, J.P.
After defendant was recorded selling crack cocaine to a police informant on four separate occasions in the Town of Rotterdam, Schenectady County, he was charged by multicount indictment with criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (four counts) and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (five counts). Thereafter, he provided the police with a lengthy written statement detailing the murder of a woman in an apartment that he shared with Dwayne Wilson in the City of Schenectady, Schenectady County.
Defendant also executed a cooperation agreement wherein he agreed to, among other things, plead guilty to two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and assist law enforcement with respect to the aforementioned unresolved homicide. The agreement provided that, in exchange for his cooperation, defendant would later be permitted to withdraw his guilty pleas and enter a plea of guilty to one count of attempted sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, in full satisfaction of the indictment, and receive a prison sentence of 2 to 6 years. The cooperation agreement was contingent upon the truthfulness of defendant's statements— including his prior written statement—and his truthful testimony at any hearings, proceedings or trials relating to the death and burial of the woman, with the veracity of such statements and testimony "to be determined solely by the District Attorney." Such agreement also required that defendant not engage in any conduct calculated to undermine his credibility as a witness.
Defendant thereafter entered a plea of guilty in accordance with the terms of the cooperation agreement. After acquiring information from defendant's neighbors which was inconsistent with defendant's statement, the People determined that he had failed to provide complete and truthful cooperation and that his statements significantly undermined his credibility as a witness, and sought to have defendant sentenced in accordance with his original plea agreement. County Court found defendant in violation of the cooperation agreement and sentenced him to an aggregate term of 14 to 24 years in prison, with one year of postrelease supervision.
Upon appeal, defendant contends that County Court's failure to hold a formal evidentiary hearing, prior to sentencing, on the issue of whether he violated the terms of his plea and cooperation agreement denied him due process. As defendant neither requested such a hearing nor moved to withdraw his plea, this issue is unpreserved for our review (see CPL 470.05 [2]; People v Jackson, 44 AD3d 301, 301 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d 1006 [2007]; People v Anonymous, 11 AD3d 245, 245 [2004], lv denied 4 NY3d 741 [2004]; People v Thompson, 193 AD2d 841, 842 [1993]; see generally People v Mackey, 77 NY2d 846 [1991]). In any event, County Court conducted an inquiry sufficient to conclude that defendant violated the cooperation agreement (see People v Valencia, 3 NY3d 714, 715 [2004]) and defendant did not contest County Court's finding in this respect or dispute the sworn evidence proffered by the People in support of their allegation that he breached the terms of the agreement. Under these circumstances, an evidentiary hearing was not required (see id. at 715; People v Eveland, 42 AD3d 755,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
People v. Garrow
...of the plea agreement was presented, "counsel cannot be faulted for failing to pursue a potentially futile endeavor" (People v. Delayo, 52 A.D.3d 1114, 1116, 860 N.Y.S.2d 321 [2008], lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 787, 866 N.Y.S.2d 613, 896 N.E.2d 99 [2008] ; see People v. Caban, 5 N.Y.3d 143, 152, 8......
-
People v. Coffey
...moved to withdraw his plea on this ground ( see People v. Saucier, 69 A.D.3d 1125, 1125-1126, 892 N.Y.S.2d 684 [2010]; People v. Delayo, 52 A.D.3d 1114, 1115, 860 N.Y.S.2d 321 [2008], lv. denied 11 N.Y.3d 787, 866 N.Y.S.2d 613, 896 N.E.2d 99 [2008] ). In any event, given that defendant was ......
-
Delayo v. Carney, 9:09-CV-1090 (GTS)
...11/17/06] [hereinafter "Sentencing Tr."].) Petitioner's conviction and sentence were unanimously affirmed. See People v. Delayo, 52 A.D.3d 1114 (N.Y. App. Div., 3d Dept. 2008). On September 26, 2008, the New York Court of Appeals denied Petitioner leave to appeal. People v. Delayo, 11 N.Y.3......
-
People v. Rahim
...however, due to defendant's failure to request a hearing at the time of sentencing ( see CPL 470.05[2]; People v. Delayo, 52 A.D.3d 1114, 1115, 860 N.Y.S.2d 321 [2008], lv. denied 11 N.Y.2d 787, 227 N.Y.S.2d 29, 181 N.E.2d 771 [2008] ). In any event, review is precluded by defendant's valid......